(a) Where the land owner is obliged to bear the costs of oil on the land for such motor vehicle;

(b) The case holding that there is a special agreement under which only the land owner shall bear the oil price according to the location of the office of the land owner and the trade name on the land-building vehicles, the entry of the tax invoice, and the entry of the oil supplier's trade ledger, etc.; and

A. In general, a vehicle into the company is subject to an external ownership or a right to manage the operation of the vehicle, and even if the land owner directly operates or manages it, the land owner company shall be entrusted with the right to manage the operation of the land for the use of the vehicle and act as an agent for the management of the operation. However, in the case of the oil supply transaction belonging to the ordinary business, the land owner company shall bear the cost of the oil in special circumstances where it is deemed that the land owner company had no intent to act for the land owner company and the other party did not intend to act with the company and only the land supplier, who is the other party, did not intend to act with the company.

(b) The case holding that there is a special agreement under which only the land owner shall bear the oil price according to the location of the office of the land owner and the trade name on the land-to-land vehicles, the entry of the tax invoice, and the entry of the oil supplier's trade ledger, etc.

Articles 24 and 48 of the Commercial Act

[Plaintiff-Appellant] Plaintiff 1 and 1 other (Law No. 15666, Sep. 8, 1987) (Gong1989, 1552, Oct. 27, 1989) (Gong1989, 1780)

[Defendant-Appellee] Plaintiff 1

Attorney Park Jung-chul, Counsel for the defendant-appellant

Chuncheon District Court Decision 92Na1951 delivered on December 21, 1992

The appeal is dismissed.

The costs of appeal are assessed against the plaintiff.

We examine the grounds of appeal.

1. In general, a motor vehicle into a company is subject to an external ownership or a right to manage the operation of the motor vehicle, and even if the land owner directly operates or manages it, the land owner shall act as an agent for the management and administration of the operation by delegation of the right to manage the operation of the motor vehicle from the company. However, the land owner shall bear the price of the motor vehicle in special circumstances where it is deemed that there is no intention to act as an agent for the land owner owner in the ordinary business and there is no intention to act as an agent for the other party in the oil supply transaction with the company, and that there is no intention to act as an agent for the other party in the ordinary business, and that there is no intention to act with the other party in the transaction with the company, the land owner shall bear the price of the oil (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decisions 8Da15628, Sep. 26, 198; 89Meu319, Oct. 27, 199).

2. According to the facts acknowledged by the court below, the non-party 1, separate from the defendant company, registered the business in the name of the non-party 2, who is the plaintiff company, and operated and managed the motor vehicles and equipment in his name. The non-party 1 continued to be supplied with the oil necessary for the operation of the mid-term season, etc. from the plaintiff company with the above vehicle, etc., on credit with the above company, and paid the price in lump sum. In particular, the office with the two sides of the above mid-term period, stating the trade name of the above "used-term", has been used as the office of the above "used-term". Further, although the plaintiff supplied the oil to the above non-party 1, the non-party 1 could not be viewed as "movable-term movable property" and the non-party 1 could not be viewed as "the non-party 2's address and the business registration number, etc. of the above non-party 2, and the other party's intent to purchase the above oil in the above transaction ledger." The non-party 1 cannot be viewed as the above.

3. Therefore, the appeal is dismissed, and all costs of appeal are assessed against the losing party. It is so decided as per Disposition by the assent of all participating Justices.

Justices Park Jong-dong (Presiding Justice)